Edit- hell, even throw in a ‘small’ market where only corp/alliance can see the orders or it creates a separate, in-corp/alliance market.
But since this is about your entitlement and little else, that’s probably irrelevant to you.
Being at loss is not “eat lower profit”. Please stop claiming things that are wrong.
That change is just remove smaller indus from the game. It’s just CCP saying “get in a big corp or get ■■■■■■”.
There is nothing else as a result in HS, where most of the people live.
You have no business owning structures if you can’t defend them. It was never the idea and now they are trying to fix it. This is basically what CCP are telling you.
However, it’s always hard to rollback changes that have given players resources or access to cool stuff.
There are free structures all throughout highsec, lowsec, and NPC null.
no there is not.
If you meant “stations”, stations are not structures. and they are nowhere as good as structure, making you operate in them plainly worse, to the point it’s not even worth.
Speaking as someone who (via an alt-corp) owns structures I think it’s a terrible change. Running a station is already not simple and fairly risky because of the wardec. So now CCP, because they appear to hate stabiliy, mining and industry, are making stations in hisec essentially just a big floating, guarenteed payout target.
So smaller corps (and even some bigger ones) won’t be able to put up or defend stations. Which means 75% of player stations in hisec will disappear either because the wardec corps will go on a killing spree or by station owners taking them down and one of the foundations of industry will be gone.
Terrible move CCP. If the problem is “too many stations in hisec” then making them into pinatas with a guarenteed payout is not the answer.
I don’t know if he will answer, but I will. As I understand it using your definition of the word “mandatory” no - they aren’t mandatory. But the structures will be in a permanent anchoring mode and can be destroyed by one timer (there’s no repair) until they get a core plugged in.
It’s almost as if that’s the intention…
It should mean something every time you place a structure and every time you destroy one. At the moment, that isn’t always the case.
By placing an ante in the core of every structure in space, the amount of structure spam will be reduced.
A station is a structure, and they offer many of the same benefits that a citadel does, and they’re free and indestructible.
I agree if they are solo in the sense that they have 1 account, however if they are solo and but have multiple accounts that can afford merc fees then I feel it is acceptable to be a solo player with a citadel in order to min / max.
However this new proposed change as it currently stands does not offer any kind of incentive for a industrial corp of any size to maintain using corp owned citadels in empire or low sec.
The negatives simply out weigh the positives right now when we go off the information we currently have.
No they are not. Structures are structures, and stations are stations. The only common thing is that they offer service and you can dock in them.
Also stations are not free. You can’t place one where you want; their services are taxed. Try to place a corporation hangar in a station, just once, you will learn something. I advice you to do that in Jita.
Thanks, Brisc. I understand that is what happens with new structures.
Are you saying an existing structure, for laugh’s sake I’ll use the TTT in Peri as an example, so are you saying if they don’t install a core there it will retroactively be stuck?
and default into a permanent anchoring mode?
I don’t think that’s what you are saying, but…maybe I’m not understanding.
Thanks.
In other words, assuming you’d like to structure to continue to exist, it’s mandatory…
If they can pay someone to defend their base, then it’s defended.
The incentives are the citadel bonuses themselves. With less citadels, the competitive edge of owning one is going to be greater. Bonuses can always be adjusted. I’m not contesting whether citadels could be buffed. It’s probably easier to assess that after this change have hit the live servers.
I commented on the notion, that people feel entitled for the ability to put up structures solo. It was never the intention as can be seen in the initial devblog about structures. Now CCP are trying to fix that.
Fixing this is obviously hard, since we’re 5 years too late and people have gotten used to what they’ve got.
To hear our illustrious CSM representative tell it, it’s at least as rough on large null sec corps as it is on small, high sec corps.
But, of course, as you rightly point out, nothing could be further from the truth.
And of course, the number of stations in high sec, isn’t actually a problem at all…unless CCP would like to explain why it’s a problem…
CCP has increased my overhead and my risk of attack - where is my increased reward so that I am more able to hire mercs to defend ?
Yes it was. Their purpose was to “replace POS” which were deployed by solo people.
You clearly don’t do industry in highsec. It’s not about a place to dock or install a jump clone. It’s about the cost of manufacturing products.
Encourage interaction between groups of players: Partly covered before, we want our new system to greatly favor player interactions via cooperative or competitive gameplay. This not only means structures should matter to be considered primary targets, but also promote public participation if needed.
You invented that notion. How many structures of the total are owned by solo players or corps?
Turns out you have no idea so you invented an issue to justify CCP’s actions.